Skip to main content

About your Search

20130204
20130212
STATION
MSNBC 23
MSNBCW 23
CSPAN 12
KQED (PBS) 3
KRCB (PBS) 3
WETA 2
CNBC 1
CNN 1
CNNW 1
KCSM (PBS) 1
KGO (ABC) 1
KQEH (PBS) 1
WHUT (Howard University Television) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 97
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 97 (some duplicates have been removed)
ABC
Feb 10, 2013 8:00am PST
adults. >> i would argue that a more restrained foreign policy is the true conservative foreign policy. >> the average american is not thinking about and trying to wonder about where the republican party is. they're thinking about how to make their life work. >> your leader in the house right there, eric cantor, where is this debate headed? >> i think it's a good debate for the republican party to have. when you lose an election, you ought to be a little bit reflective and ought to think back and ought to begin to say, what do we need to do differently? we didn't do badly in the election, but the president won with less than he was elected in '08, lower popular vote, lower electoral vote. we held the house, we have 30 governors. the idea this is some existential crisis is overdone, i think, but we didn't win so what do we need differently. i like what we're hearing and like the direct line that governor jindal took because i think we have -- >> we can't be too -- >> yeah, we nearly were in the fiscal cliff and could have triggered a big tax increase. i don't want to be stupid but you a
FOX News
Feb 10, 2013 1:00pm PST
have a foreign policy that is coming apart. >>gregg: you were in the carter administration. all hands on deck the. >> the president himself, for ten, 15, 20 hours a day, in the middle of the greatest moments of this, involved himself personally. we were trying to get them out the day they flew home we were there all night and the next morning up until the time of the inauguration and the president was hands on. the notion this president was disengaged and talked to no one after the 15 minute meeting and went off the next day to a fundraiser? now we understand and this is causing the republicans today to start saying, patrol and -- start saying, graham and others, they will hold up the nomination. >>gregg: does it appear lights were out at the white house while an american diplomat was underattack and other americans? >> that is right. to me, the bottom line question that pat raises and you raised, too, do we have a coherent foreign policy and national security policy not only through iran and north korea but through the role of the united states in rooting out terrorism in north afric
MSNBC
Feb 7, 2013 3:00am PST
and didn't because he was so, quote, strong on foreign policy. >> you say, quote. that's why i voted for him. i trusted george bush to make hard, tough decisions that i thought john kerry might waver on. >> thank you. which is why i don't think obama will have any problem with this. >> i think it helps him. >> he'll look like a strong, and just like he did a year ago, just like when he killed bin laden, he looks incredibly strong on foreign policy. and this will not provide a weak spot for him in the long run. >> mika, really quickly, i agree with you there. i don't think there's going to be a political fallout from it. >> yeah. >> i think one of the things that disturbs me so much is the fact that americans are not any more concerned about other americans being able to be targeted and killed without any due process. and i'll say it again because i can hear people saying, well, why didn't you say that about george w. bush? i did. i did on padilla. i did when there were americans whose constitutional rights were being eviscerated by what was going on during the bush era. i spoke out t
MSNBC
Feb 11, 2013 9:00am PST
rice. there's a controversy. we have republicans who are in a weird position on foreign policy and national security precisely because the president has been so aggressive. in a lot of ways there's not a lot of daylight between what republicans do in the same position as democrats. unless we're bipartisan, there is a lot of people in particular, chuck hagel as defense secretary nominee, and there has been some talk by some in the gop leadership that they will filibuster his nomination. john mccain saying he won't. what is your read on all that many. >> i think it will be a very interesting move to filibuster. it will be a drastic move. wron if you guys saw, but carl livin said he will hold a vote on the nomination tomorrow, so they are moving ahead with it. my hunch is that they won't because i think deep down inside republican senators believe that a president does deserve to choose his advisors, and i think it sets a bad press debt because one day there will be a republican in the white house again. maybe not, i guess. the venom from republican senators towards chuck hagel is
PBS
Feb 8, 2013 5:30pm PST
? >> ultimately the key decision makers in american foreign policy are the same people. which is the president and its key advisors on the national security council. and the issue is not whether or not the advocates in the state department or the pentagon are there. i think at some point the united states government and the white house have to make a decision that syria is an actual danger to america's national security interests. it is not something we can wash our hands from. and there are serious dangers and implications to the united states and the president actually to ask its national security team for realistic options that then he request gather his team and debate and decide about. there hasn't, i think, been a serious debate even with thunited stasgovernment as to what might be our three top options what are the costs and benefits of each. and if we were to pursue one of them, how would we do it. >> is there a legitimate argument that this destabilizes turkey to some degree, an important country to the united states, and a nato ally, andrew. >> absolutely. thousands of syrians go ove
PBS
Feb 8, 2013 3:00pm PST
saying you know foreign policy, here is another bit of evidence that it is run from the white house. now the president has the perfect right to overrule. >> yes. >> he is is the can kmnd-- commander in chief and some of the best decisions a man named elliott cone write a book on this, some of the best presidential decisions have been overruled. so within that perfect right he is, nonetheless the concentration of power in the white house across a whole range of spheres is i think a little troubling. and seconds's very hard to believe that there wasn't any politics in this domestic politics, i mean. now it could be arming the rebels was ineffective but if you have this broad sweep of people saying we should arm the rebels and the white house says no, it's hard to believe since it was so politically convenient not-- that it wasn't a mistake. and now the wrong rebels are in -- >> politics does have a role sometimes. >> the president did, in fact, overrule his advisors, including the vice president, including the secretary of defense gates, on going after osama bin laden. and elise ened to jo
CNBC
Feb 7, 2013 7:00pm EST
.c., foreign policy, the sad truth about benghazi. the cia director john brennan and his support for drone bombings to kill american traitors and we might get into waterboarding as well. first up the automatic sequester spending cuts set to kick in in three weeks. outgoing secretary of defense leon pan et offered these dire warning today before congress. take a listen. >> frankly one of the greatest security risks we are now facing as a nation that, this budget uncertainty could prompt the most significant readiness -- military readiness crisis in more than a decade. >> all right. but there are ways to responsibly trim the pentagon's budget and still protect national security. former defense undersecretary michelle flournoy, if identify got that right -- michelle flournoy, i beg your pardon, she penned an op-ed in the wall street journal this week. joining us is aforementioned michele flournoy. michelle, or undersecretary, which ever you prefer -- >> michelle, please. >> i thought your piece was terrific. sequester or not, defense department is going to lose 10% of its budget and you think
MSNBC
Feb 7, 2013 7:00am PST
in terms of foreign policy from the bush doctrine, from the bush era policies, but in many ways has followed them and has been handed this entire security apparatus, this particular program began in 2004, about 400 strikes have happened so far. about 3,000 people have been killed, mostly pakistan, somali, yemen. but you have had this sort of deafening silence for the most part from progressives and liberals around this. you have had a few voices certainly on the hill and even on your network to raise questions about it, but by and large, the president has been given something of a pass. i think also the public has moved beyond this in some ways. there's a post-9/11 new normal in terms of how the public looks at the prosecution of this war on terror. they see it, it seems to me, as a vast war, an endless war in some ways that might be best prosecuted in this way rather than those large land wars we saw in afghanistan and iraq of this sort of pinpointed targeting of folks seem so far to have found some positive backing from americans. >> the cover of "time" magazine is rise of the dro
MSNBC
Feb 7, 2013 6:00pm PST
order, and morality. it should be rejected as a tool of foreign policy." the church committee report came out, said that. gerald ford issued an executive order banning assassinations. the select committees on intelligence were formed in the house and the senate to exert oversight over the cia. since the armed services committees who had been supposedly overseeing them had fallen down on the job, actually, they'd never seen all that interested in that part of the job in the first place. and that is how we got to a place where these senators today could question this cia director nominee under the expectation that he has to answer to them. and they need to be apprised of what the cia is doing every step of the way. and targeted killing by the cia is not just something they're allowed to do quietly on their own or in private with the white house without at least having to explain. >> every american has the right to know when their government believes it's allowed to kill them. and ensuring that the congress has the documents and information it needs to conduct robust oversight is centra
MSNBC
Feb 11, 2013 2:00pm PST
a serious discussion about foreign policy in defense during these nomination hearings. whether it's hagel or brennan or whatever. they're just taking cheap shots all over the place and they're not having a serious discussion. >> what -- >> in other words, if dick cheney wants to get in the ball game and have a really serious -- >> you raise this, i have to answer your question. what is the burr in lindsey graham's saddle? >> well -- >> why is he putting a hold on hagel? >> he's not going to put a hold on hagel. that's just -- he's just grabbing his ankles on the way out the door. hagel is going to be confirmed. it's a done deal. john mccain has blessed it. john mccain said he gave the committee enough -- said hagel gave the committee enough information i'm not going to hold him up on benghazi. i think lindsey graham is there to be the last annoying guy to make sure that hagel keeps whatever promises he made behind the scenes -- >> howard, does this -- >> to carl levin and -- >> the cisco kid may have handed 9 okay but poncho is still fighting the war. thank you, howard and joan. >>> miche
MSNBC
Feb 11, 2013 4:00pm PST
when he's had a stellar record on foreign policy. >> but you know these babbitts that sit in the audience for people like him. these bergers. you can see them from the rotary club, very polite. i can hear the audience, excellent point. well put, vice president. this second rate -- they all agree, they wouldn't have approved these people. wyoming doesn't deserve this guy. it's a beautiful state. >> i think that maybe dick cheney has a case of drone envy here. >> yeah. >> really? >> well, i mean -- >> go on, sir. >> okay. he's the guy who is used to being attacked by the aclu. >> i see. >> you see what i'm saying? actually president obama has got some weapons that dick cheney wouldn't mind having had, and the president -- >> this is getting way too -- pull back. >> and the president has been unafraid to use them. >> right. >> serious point -- >> i get -- >> the republicans spent a generation unhorsing democrats because democrats were, quote, weak on defense. >> they weren't willing to pull the trigger. >> they weren't willing to pull the trigger. barack obama, to the dismay
Current
Feb 5, 2013 3:00am PST
box right? >> such a key component of obama's foreign policy has been we're going to slip in across borders, we're going to do covert actions kill who we need to kill as we view that. it is extremely -- you know, these kind of things, the way these things operate the machinery behind it when you read this memo, i mean this is what you would call, you know, a barnburner scoop. this is actually amazing stuff to see this written down in black and white the way the government does this. >> bill: again i think liberals progressives, would be raising holy hell if george bush and dick cheney -- if this were their policy demanding at least to know what the guidelines are. i think we should be equally strong, i believe in making that demand. even if it's president obama and joe biden. their policy. because this is a big deal. and you know -- >> if you think guys likewide-do that? -- wyden will do that? >> bill: he wrote letters saying we want to see all of the memos on drone policy and we want to see what the guidelines are. what rules you are following. and i think the american people deser
CNN
Feb 6, 2013 1:00pm PST
the weapons. >> you delivered a major foreign policy today at the heritage foundation. well thought out speech on national security issues. why now? why did you decide to do it? because you knew that it was going to jump-start the speculation you want to establish foreign policy credentials for a possible run in 2016. >> you know, i just joined the foreign relations committee. i wanted to spell out what my mission is for the foreign policy. it's a unique position and one that needs to be expressed. we often have two polar extremes and really just one, for the most part, that we're everywhere you will a of the time. the other extreme is that it would be nowhere any of the time and that would be isolationism. there's a realistic approach somewhere in the middle and it would involve containment. i talked a lot about george kennan who may be the most famous diplomats, thought to be one of the chief architects of containment and i think there's some of ththat may apply to rad islam. it's an thet cal to freedom and has to be opposed at various parts around the world but i don't think the standard ap
FOX News
Feb 10, 2013 8:00am PST
. they have huge questions or senator hagel and his positions on how he would handle foreign policy, particularly with opposing sanctions on iran and north korea and israel. with that said, it was the secretary of defense secretary of, they did not do enough. so i think that there's these questions that need to be answered. as we know, it's been fox news covering this issue, ignored by the mainstream media. this is a moment in time we've loved an -- lost and embassador and several americans. >> one phone call, 5:00. >> one phone call. >> the white house would say the president was briefed by advisors. you served the president, george w. bush. >> that's right. when dealing with an attack, when american lives are in harm's way, we know that becomes quicklily a high priority for the president. if we know -- we know there's an attack going under way. >> what should he have done? >> i really think you have to step aside from being so focused on the election at that moment in time and make this one of your top priorities. >> should he have been back in the oval office behind the desk? >>
FOX News
Feb 5, 2013 3:00pm PST
romney, just the economy. not foreign policy or social issues, very focused. the republican establishment loved that, crossroads spent 300 million-dollar and they lost. let the republicans and conservatives of the country run campaigns. >> and crossroads will spend tens of millions of more dollars in 2014 supporting more establishment candidates against people like todd aiken, murdock in indiana. how does this fit together? >> let me rise above the partisan bickering here. and let us reason together. i think one way that you can unite the party, which has had major success in integrating the more populous elements is agree on the buckley rule. people will try to support and nominate the most conservative candidate who can win. if you don't try to make statements by nominating extreme conservatives who can be sort of enjoyable and outside the populous but have no chance of winning in a general election, you don't go that way. classic example, delaware senate 2010. they threw away a seat. they would have had a moderate. a semi-liberal republican but this beats a hard line liberal democrat a
MSNBC
Feb 7, 2013 12:00am PST
. it's a major component of his foreign policy. and listen, there is a difference between operational oversight, which is what congressman rogers was stressing in the interview with andrea mitchell, and legal oversight. and up until this point we really haven't seen any legal justification that the administration has presented for why it can target american civilians abroad if it has determined an imminent threat to the homeland. >> well, it was written today in the "new yorker" that the justification that they're using is a comparison to military troops going into cambodia in vietnam. that's how the nixon administration, they're making that comparison. i don't know how that's going to set with a lot of people. so i'm anxious to hear what mr. brennan does for justification tomorrow. sam? >> let me add one point to that which is the other thing the administration has done is well, we've been talking about this process, attorney general eric holder has been talking about this process. john brennan has been talking about this process publicly. we have outlined it. and i think there is a
MSNBC
Feb 8, 2013 10:00am PST
season for arming the rebels in syria. more than 60,000 people have died, but that others on the foreign policy team pushed back, and the president made a decision not to. >> yeah. let me just say on this one i may be inclined toward the president. i'm not certain who those -- who would get those weapons. i don't want to fwet into too much detail. i'm also on the intelligence committee, but i'm -- i am not certain that those weapons wouldn't fall into the wrong hands, and that's a real problem we've had in syria. maybe more should be done earlier on to get better control of the rebels, but now to me there's too many unsavory pro-islamist elements among those rebels, so i am not certain that they should be given weapons. that's a tough call, and i'm not close enough to it on the ground, but from what i do know, i'm very leary about giving any weapons because they could end up in the hands of islamists. >> congressman peter king, it's great to have your perspective, and thank you and good luck in the storm for you and your constitch wednesday. thank you for being with us today. >> thank yo
MSNBC
Feb 7, 2013 3:00am EST
. this is a major component of the president's war on terror. it's a major component of his foreign policy. and listen, there is a difference between operational oversight, which is what congressman rogers was stressing in the interview with andrea mitchell, and legal oversight. and up until this point we really haven't seen any legal justification that the administration has presented for why it can target american civilians abroad if it has determined an imminent threat to the homeland. >> well, it was written today in the "new yorker" that the justification that they're using is a comparison to military troops going into cambodia in vietnam. that's how the nixon aw incredie changes. ri and i think there is a role for congress to play. and i would add even for the american public to play to a certain extent in judging what kind of legal justifications the administration is using. i understand the administration doesn't want to set a bad precedent here, but these are weighty matters. >> colonel, what kind of intel are we getting on the ground? i mean we have to be sure that we're not kill
CSPAN
Feb 6, 2013 10:00am EST
an important foreign policy shift both in terms of process and engagement in the region. when i say process i say that it is grounded for the first time in our history in the bedrock of parliamentry consent, public legitimacy, and many stakeholders that matter being onboard in the manging of foreign policy. so this is a first for pakistan, including our relationship with the united states, which is now pretty much run by parliamentry guidelines, and we move affording to those now, which does empower us to take decisions that are sustainable, we hope. and we look for a relationship that is long lasting and not just a function of our relationship with the united states and pakistan as it transitions after the region. >> thank you for that. did they offer you breakfast? >> yes, they did. >> so busy taking notes. let me ask you one or two and move to my colleagues. you were early in offering congratulations to john kerry. i wanted to ask you about the impact if any you see kerry moving in as secretary of state is going to have. as you know the "wall street journal" ran an oped piece last week tal
PBS
Feb 3, 2013 6:30pm PST
against foreign persons, i think, is troubling from a moral, ethical, and policy point of view. but i don't subscribe to the fact that it's illegal under u.s. law. and that's the law that the president is bound by the constitution to follow. my focus has been primarily, and i'm not saying it's a good program. i'm just saying that i think it's a moral policy question rather than a legal one primarily for the president. i focus primarily on the targeted killing of american citizens, which does bring into play the united states constitution and the rule of law in the united states. and i'm very troubled about that aspect of it. >> can you help us understand how this official program of targeted killing works? >> apparently, the agencies, primarily the pentagon and the c.i.a. nominate people to be on the list. and it goes through what the white house promises is a very rigorous process of review to determine if those people should or should not be on the list. we don't know exactly what the standard is. but it involves a number of criteria, including whether the host country, the country in w
PBS
Feb 4, 2013 9:00pm PST
for both the law, for our foreign policy, and for civilians in a killing program that we should be doubly concerned in getting that information out there, so that we make sure that we don't make those mistakes or we correct them when we do. >> let's close with a brief discussion on the issue of surveillance and eavesdropping. on the 31st of december, the president extended this controversial wiretapping act until 2017. the f.i.s.a. act? >> foreign intelligence rveiance act. >> rig. are you both troubled by the seeming lack of oversight for this extension of surveillance and wiretapping of suspected terrorists in this country? do you think there's a real danger here? >> i think there's a tremendous danger. and i think, you know there has been a codification of the expansion of power under george bush. and so any time that congress or through policies that are happening now that we're institutionalizing, codifying, making hard in our infrastructure things at we lirally thkable n or 11 years ago is of tremendous concern to us. it shows our slippage. and we don't always realize that that's wh
MSNBC
Feb 9, 2013 7:00am PST
and it is the lasting legacy of foreign policy. >> and that leave mes with the question because of so many ideological differences of president obama and president bush, but not on this. it suggests possibilities that presidents are just presidents and they always expand their kind of war powers which is one possibility, and the other is that the president nose something that i don't know about what constitutes threats to the national security, and the third is that well, on this one question, this president is just as hawk ish as george w. bush and any way to adjudicate the possibilities of what war means to the obama administration? >> well, i think that, i think that is absolutely right, it has been a continuation of the bush administration policies, and yes, administrations always try to push the outer bounds of the authority. but one thank is clear is that the laws of war have not changed even if the practice has changed. there are really three reasons that a country can, a state can use force outside of its borders. one, if it is the victim of an armed attack and second if the u.n. security coun
MSNBC
Feb 8, 2013 3:00am PST
troubled by it, as someone who's served in the white house on foreign policy. what bothered you the most about the way it was put together? >> let's separate it into two sets of issues. one is the criteria for when the united states does say a drone attack and the other is the process by which we make the specific decision. the criteria are simply not sustainable. for example, there's three. the first with is that it has to be imminent, the idea that the terrorists planning an attack are about to launch an attack. we don't know that. so you can't meet the first threshold you set. we don't wait till it's imminent because we never know. and that's clear if you look at all the drone strikes we've done, by the time someone has made the career choice to be a terrorist, we decide that they qualify as a potential target. indeed we go beyond that. so-called signature strikes, you target people who appear to be doing the sorts of things that terrorists tend to do. we set up criteria that we ourselves do not meet. we then say it has to be the capture is infeasible. you don't want to have to captur
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 97 (some duplicates have been removed)